MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128039332 · doi:10.1177/1748048506063763

The Politics of Media Accountability in Africa

2006· article· en· W2128039332 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Communication Gazette · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia Influence and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountabilityCredibilityDemocratizationPoliticsSustenanceDemocracyPolitical scienceContext (archaeology)Public relationsPublic administrationSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The media have had a positive impact on democratization in Africa as conduits for political education, watchdogs of political accountability and forums for civic engagement. These developments notwithstanding, some critics characterize the media less sanguinely, highlighting attitudes that portray them as irresponsible, self-serving, unaccountable and a threat to the credibility and sustenance of the democratic process. In the context of the foregoing, this article evaluates various mechanisms of media accountability in Africa, and concludes that they are fraught with tensions among various political interests. It argues that state-controlled mechanisms of accountability are not always conducive to democracy, because they could be subject to abuse. There is, therefore, the need for the media themselves to put in place procedures and demonstrate attitudes and levels of performance that ensure the highest standards of professionalism and levels of probity and accountability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it